Download An Endangered Species Act Success Story

AMERICAN BIRDS
an
Endangered
Species Act
SUCCESS STORY
American Birds
Aleutian Canada Geese/USFWS
— An Endangered Species Act Success Story —
Summary
How Birds Benefit from ESA Listing
This report, produced by American Bird Conservancy (ABC),
outlines the current status and population trends of birds
listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and provides individual accounts documenting the current status
of each listed species, subspecies, or population segment.
Analysis of this data shows that significantly more birds
listed under the ESA are increasing than are decreasing.
Species that are considered to be in danger of extinction,
or that may become so, can be considered for listing under
the ESA. Several excellent resources that provide more
information on the listing process­—and the ESA regulatory
process as a whole—are available elsewhere. The full text
of the Act can be found at www.fws.gov/endangered/esa.
html, and a useful summary article can be found at www.
environmentaldefense.org.
This report is intended to assist policymakers, the conservation community,
and the general public in determining
how the Act is performing in its goal of
preventing extinction and restoring endangered birds.
California Least Tern/USFWS
There is broad consensus in the conservation community that the ESA can
be strengthened—for example, through
increased funding, creating a more
streamlined process by which species
can be listed and de-listed, and reinforcing the consultation process between
federal agencies concerning actions that
may affect endangered species. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize the
many strengths of the current legislation, and we seek to highlight those, and
how they have benefited birds.
The ESA is
perhaps the most
important piece
of environmental
legislation ever
passed in the
United States.
This report focuses primarily on those
birds that breed in the continental United States. Hawaiian
birds, many of which disappeared or were at the brink of
extinction long before the ESA was enacted, are treated in
a separate section. Foreign-listed species and those that
occur in U.S. dependent territories are excluded, as are
birds that likely became extinct before or around the time
the ESA was enacted.
Once a species is listed, it receives
certain mandatory protections to aid its
recovery. Such protections include prohibitions on taking, trading, or harming
a species, its nest, or its eggs. Exceptions to prosecution under the Act may
be made to prevent financial hardship to
individuals, and to allow subsistence activities by certain native Alaskans. Penalties under the Act can include fines and
imprisonment in serious cases.
Critical Habitat designations further protect endangered birds by safeguarding
areas deemed essential for a species’
survival and recovery. To achieve recovery, areas must sometimes be designated as Critical Habitat even though
they are not currently occupied by the
species, allowing for future population
increases and range expansion. Without this, some species may be restricted to tiny populations and destined to
remain on the endangered species list forever. The Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce are provided with
latitude to prevent the designation of Critical Habitat from
interfering unduly with economic development or national
security.
Photo credits previous page: U.S. Capitol/Morguefile.com, Brown Pelicans/USFWS, Golden-cheeked Warbler/USFWS, Whooping and Sandhill Cranes/USFWS, Bald Eagle/Matthew MacManes.
2
In certain cases, landowners are permitted to create Habitat Conservation Plans (see page 5) that allow for habitat
modifications while continuing protection for the affected
species. To date, 430 such plans have been approved for
all endangered species, and several of the areas covered
exceed one million acres in extent.
Federal Protection
Any federal agency that believes an action they plan to
authorize, fund, or carry out, could affect an endangered
species must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), or with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to determine whether
the action will jeopardize the species concerned. The
requirement for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to initiate consultations as part of their pesticide
registration process was recently changed amid much
controversy. The EPA now has sole discretion over whether
to initiate a consultation, rather than being bound to do
so by the Act. While the government maintains that this
helps to streamline and improve the process, conservation groups are in unanimous agreement that the Act was
weakened by the change.
If a federal action has the potential to jeopardize a species, a series of consultations (both informal and formal)
and biological assessments are required. These can
result in the prevention of the proposed action, cause
amendments to proposed actions, or result in mitigation
measures to counterbalance detrimental outcomes. The
informal consultation process frequently results in modifications to agency actions that reduce harm to endangered
species or provide conservation benefits.
Of the more than 18,000 formal inter-agency consultations that took place between 1996 and 2004, less than
four percent resulted in the conclusion that the proposed
agency action would likely place a species in jeopardy.
This does not diminish the importance of these consultations however. Although few federal actions require
modification, the consequence to individual endangered
species of eliminating the consultation process could be
disastrous.
Recovery Plans
A Recovery Plan must be produced for each listed
species. These plans summarize the species’ status and
threats, set recovery goals and criteria, and estimate
costs for recovery actions. The budgeting process involves
a number of factors, including the cost of answering
petitions and law suits. A species prioritization process
grades how taxonomically unique each listed species is
and how likely it is that conservation efforts will succeed.
This helps further determine the amount of funding a
species can receive. Funds cover activities such as habitat
management and land purchase.
Public Involvement
A range of other benefits accrue to listed species, including public awareness, which can lead to greater public
involvement in voluntary management programs such as
Safe Harbor Agreements. Several National Wildlife Refuges have also been established specifically to protect
ESA-listed species. Additionally, cooperative agreements
with states provide funding for endangered species recovery efforts, and in the case of species that are considered
“Candidates” for protection under the Act, conservation
agreements and landowner incentives can help to increase species populations, while preventing the need for
additional regulation. See page 5 for more information on
the ESA and landowners.
Although federal agencies and states are responsible for
much of the ESA’s success, major credit must also be
given to the many private individuals and conservation
organizations that have made critical contributions to
the prevention of extinctions, and to species recovery.
For more information on some of these efforts see: www.
abcbirds.org/esa.
Sandhill Cranes/USFWS
3
History and Impact of the ESA  
B
Since its passage, the Act has undergone significant
amendments on three occasions, once under President
Carter, and twice under President Reagan. Among the
amendments made under Carter were Critical Habitat
provisions, to be drawn up concurrently with species
listings wherever possible; and the
creation of a cabinet-level committee
Although the
with the power to exempt certain federal
projects from compliance with the Act
Endangered Species
(though few such exemptions have been
Act protects all
granted). Amendments made during
endangered animals
the Reagan presidency included: the
introduction of Habitat Conservation
and plants, birds
Plans, which permitted landowners to
have played a special
alter habitat if they also implemented
role in its history
mitigation measures; a prohibition on
and impact.
considering the economic implications
of listing a species; a requirement that
“candidate” and de-listed species be
monitored; a framework to improve the
implementation of Recovery Plans, and
the establishment of a “Cooperative
Endangered Species Conservation
Fund”.
In 1918, as bird declines continued, the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) was
enacted to regulate “take” (including
hunting and ‘live’ collection for the
bird and egg trade). While the MBTA
provided invaluable protection to
birds, it only regulated hunting and
capture; and did little to help species
that were affected by human-induced
threats such as habitat loss, introduced
predators, and environmental toxins.
Thus, even with the MBTA in force,
birds such as the Whooping Crane and
Aleutian Canada Goose continued to
decline.
Bird Declines
Mississippi Sandhill Cranes/USFWS
y the early 1900s America had witnessed the
disappearance of several spectacular bird
species, including the Great Auk, Passenger
Pigeon, Carolina Parakeet, and Labrador Duck­—lost mostly
to excessive, unregulated hunting.
In the 1950s and 60s, there was a
population crash in some very visible
bird species, namely the Bald Eagle,
Peregrine Falcon, and Brown Pelican. Research showed
that the culprits were organochlorine pesticides such as
DDT, which caused eggshell thinning and dramatically
reduced breeding success. As the Bald Eagle tumbled
towards extinction in the lower 48 states, the impetus for
greater legal protection for the country’s most imperiled
wildlife mounted. In 1966 the Endangered Species
Preservation Act was passed. This was strengthened in
1969, and in 1973 finally became the ESA.
The scope of the ESA legislation was broad, and included
a process for identifying species that qualified for listing,
habitat protection measures, and a mechanism to ensure
that the federal government itself did not contribute
to endangered species declines. It also mandated
cooperation with states, international cooperation, and
trade and take restrictions.
4
ESA Under Attack
In 1992, authorization of the ESA expired. The prohibitions
and requirements of the Act still remained in force, but
appropriations had to be sought yearly. Ever since, the
Act has been the focus of attacks from interest groups
bent on relaxing species protections to allow increased
development.
As this report illustrates, the Act continues to help
endangered birds recover, and there are more than two
and one-half times as many listed bird species that are
increasing or stable than are decreasing. Species that are
increasing have also been protected under the ESA an
average of ten years longer than those that are decreasing,
indicating that the longer conservation efforts continue,
the better the results.
M
any landowners
are proud to play
host to America’s
endangered species. They
work cooperatively with state and federal biologists to
maintain healthy populations, at the same time preserving
the natural beauty of their surroundings and the economic
productivity of their property.
Landowners who wish to develop lands
that harbor endangered species can
apply for permits to do so. Agency
permission for these developments
is contingent upon the approval of a
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) that
ensures habitat alterations do not pose
a risk to the survival and recovery of the
species in question. To date, more than
380 such plans have been implemented
for the birds covered by this report alone.
Unfortunately, not all HCPs are effective
though, and many need additional
funding. Landowners are typically
exempted from providing these funds
under a “No Surprises” policy implicit in
the HCP agreement.
Ranch Conservation Bank in Texas placed a conservation
easement on several hundred acres of a 3,000-acre
ranch to protect Golden-cheeked Warblers, in exchange
for which they received USFWS credits that can be sold to
mitigate impacts to warbler habitat elsewhere. However, it
is important that such easements include restoration, and
that this program does not result in a net loss of habitat
for the species in question.
Many landowners
are proud to play
host to America's
endangered species.
Red-cockaded Woodpecker/Bill Schmoker
Tree Farm/Mike Parr
The ESA and Landowners
Federal Support
The Department of the Interior provides support to help
conserve endangered species through two major grant
programs that will provide more than $75 million to
support a range of activities undertaken by states and
private landowners in the current budget year. The Forest
Service and many states also offer financial assistance
to landowners, through the federally funded Landowner
Incentives Program for example, to help manage
endangered species on their lands.
A new “Conservation Banking” program also allows
landowners to protect habitat for endangered species,
and then sell conservation credits to developers to
mitigate habitat alteration. For example, the Hickory Pass
In some cases, the boundaries of
Critical Habitat may be designated
so as to alleviate potential economic
impacts. The Act also contains
provisions to prevent hardship to
individuals, to facilitate disaster relief
efforts, and to ensure that actions
deemed necessary to national
security are not impeded.
Landowner Assurances
Two programs, “Safe Harbor” and
“Candidate Conservation Agreements
with Assurances” allow landowners
to gain assurance that their voluntary
actions to improve habitat or
increase species numbers will not
result in additional regulation. The Safe Harbor program
has been particularly successful in restoring Red-cockaded
Woodpecker populations in the Southeast.
The Act does place reasonable restrictions on projects
that could result in the decimation of habitat for
endangered species. The Act’s system of checks and
balances has stood America and its endangered species
in good stead for more than 30 years. With the growth
of birdwatching and wildlife tourism, the ESA is helping
to build the foundation for future economic prosperity,
and is preserving a precious resource that has enormous
educational and scientific value.
Photo/Mike Parr
5
Population Trends of
Species Since Listing
Increase 44%
Extinct 2%
Undetermined 12%
Stable 19%
Decrease 23%
Photo credits, clockwise from top: Brown Pelicans/Gary Smyle, Light-footed
Clapper Rail/James Gallagher, Snowy Plover/Gary Smyle,
Steller’s Eider/USFWS, Dusky Seaside Sparrow/USFWS.
Species Accounts
Species have been categorized according to their population trend since the time they were listed under the ESA. They
appear in standard taxonomic order within each category. The date of listing appears after each bird’s scientific name.
Scientific names follow those used by USFWS. The Mexican Duck is omitted as it is no longer considered a valid taxon.
Conservation measures undertaken for each species are indicated by symbols (see below) that follow the listing date. All
species listed under predecessor Acts at the time the current ESA was signed into law are considered here to have been
listed since 1973. Population figures refer to the estimated total number of breeding adults, except where noted. Some
population trend categorizations differ from USFWS reports to Congress based on recent field reports from biologists.
Species were allocated to categories as follows: 
Increase – Population has increased since listing.
Stable – Current population is similar to that at the time of listing, or population has stabilized since listing.
Decrease – Population has decreased since listing.
 An increasing population does not necessarily indicate that conservation measures have fully succeeded. Many species in this
category require ongoing conservation attention. Conversely, a decreasing trend does not necessarily show that conservation measures
have failed. Even if large amounts of a species’ habitat are effectively protected, the overall population will still decrease if habitat loss
continues, or if key management issues are not addressed. Also, for species with extremely limited habitat, stabilizing populations at
current levels may be the only realistic recovery goal.
CH

Critical Habitat designated
SSRP
Subject of a Single Species Recovery Plan
(includes species with multiple regional plans)
MSRP
Included in a Multi-Species Recovery Plan
HCP:
X
Benefits from Habitat Conservation Plans
X=number of Plans
NWR: X
Occurs on National Wildlife Refuges
X=number of Refuges
SH
Benefits from Safe Harbor Agreements


Species that have been removed from the ESA,
or have had a significant portion of their population
delisted, due to recovery
Acknowledgements
Numerous individuals and organizations deserve thanks for assisting with the compilation of this report. In particular, Michael Bean and Tim Male at
Environmental Defense, Kieran Suckling at the Center for Biological Diversity, and Al Lieberman at the Hawaii Endangered Bird Program. Among the primary sources for the data presented are multiple Recovery Plans and other online and printed documents provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
online databases supplied by BirdLife International, the National Audubon Society, and NatureServe; and consultations with field biologists.
A full list of sources is provided on the ABC web site at www.abcbirds.org/esa.
6
INCREASE
USFWS
Canada Goose, “Aleutian” subspecies
(Branta canadensis leucopareia) 1973 
By the mid-1970s, this subspecies had been reduced to approximately 800 individuals,
having been extirpated from most of its breeding islands by introduced foxes. Following large
scale efforts to remove these foxes, and hunting restrictions, the population has soared
to more than 60,000 birds. It was removed from the endangered list in 2001. Subsequent
taxonomic reclassification of the Canada Goose has resulted in this being considered a
subspecies of the Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii). This subspecies migrates south to
Pacific coast states after nesting.
Bill Hubick
Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) 1973 
The Brown Pelican has rebounded dramatically from 1970s lows thanks to the ban on DDT,
reintroductions, and the establishment of several key National Wildlife Refuges. The Atlantic
Coast, Alabama, and Florida populations now number more than 100,000 birds, and pelicans
in these areas were delisted in 1985. Despite the fact that several populations are still listed,
the species as a whole is widely considered to have recovered.
USFWS
Wood Stork (Mycteria americana) 1984
SSRP
NWR: 50
This species formerly ranged across most of the southeastern United States and Texas, but
breeding is currently limited to Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. Its nesting population
declined from an estimated 40,000 birds in the 1930s to a low of 5,000 in 1978 due to
habitat loss and water level changes, particularly in southern Florida. The stork has since
rebounded following a northerly range extension, adaptation to managed wetlands, and
the provision of nesting platforms. It now has an apparently stable base population of
approximately 11,000 adults. The species also occurs widely in the Neotropics.
USFWS
CH
California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus) 1973 
SSRP
HCP: 3
The California Condor declined due to persecution, poisoning (consuming lead fragments
from carcasses left behind by hunters, and by consuming poisoned animals), and collisions
with power lines. In 1987, with just 22 left, the last remaining wild birds were taken into captivity. After five years of intensive captive-breeding, reintroductions began at sites in Arizona
and California, and by December 2005, the total wild condor population stood at 127 birds,
with a further 146 individuals in captivity. Released birds are now nesting in the wild and one
pair has successfully fledged a chick.
7
Angel Montoya/The Peregrine Fund
Laura Erickson/Binoculars.com
Robb Bennett, USGS
Snail Kite, “Everglades” subspecies
CH
(Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus) 1973 
MSRP
NWR: 3
In the U.S., Snail Kites are only found in Florida. Reduced to just 65 birds in 1975, the kite
recovered to a reported 3,577 birds by 1999 due to management, and favorable water levels
that created ideal nesting and foraging conditions. The species is especially vulnerable to
drought which depletes its primary food source, the apple snail, and allows predators access
to nests which are built over water. A recent apparent 50% decline can be attributed to water
level management problems in the Everglades hydro-system. The species also occurs widely
throughout the Neotropics.
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
CH SSRP HCP: 122 NWR: 374
1973 
The Bald Eagle has been proposed for delisting in the lower 48 states where it has recovered
dramatically following the cancellation of the pesticides DDT and dieldrin, and through a
program of reintroduction and nest site protection. In the 1950s and ‘60s, eagle numbers
plummeted because of widespread breeding failure due to DDT-caused eggshell thinning. The
Alaskan population largely escaped this threat and was never listed. In the lower 48 states the
eagle has recovered from a low of just over 800 breeding birds to some 16,000 today. 
Aplomado Falcon, “Northern” subspecies (Falco femoralis septentrionalis)
SH
1986 SSRP NWR: 3 
This species was extirpated from the U.S. by the 1950s, likely as a result of habitat conversion
and pesticide use. A reintroduction program involving the release of more than 1,000 birds
has recently been launched in south Texas. To date, this has resulted in the formation of 44
pairs, and the production of more than 170 young. The birds are found on public and private
lands in the vicinity of Laguna Atascosa, Matagorda Island, and Aransas National Wildlife
Refuges. Small numbers also appear to be invading southern New Mexico naturally from the
south, where the species ranges from Mexico to South America. 
Peregrine Falcon, “American” subspecies (Falco peregrinus anatum) 1973 
USFWS
By 1975, the American Peregrine Falcon had been reduced to just 650 breeding birds in
the lower 48 states, and virtually eliminated from the East and Midwest. By 1999 however,
following a ban on DDT, and a major effort to reintroduce captive-raised birds, the breeding
population had recovered to at least 3,350 individuals. The American Peregrine Falcon was
removed from the list of endangered species in 1999. Numbers continue to increase.
Peregrine Falcon, “Arctic” subspecies (Falco peregrinus tundrius) 1973 
USFWS
Arctic Peregrine Falcons may have declined by as much as 80 percent during the 1950s and
60s due to DDT use, but enough survived to make the release of captive-bred birds unnecessary. Arctic Peregrine numbers increased after the cancellation of DDT, and the subspecies
was eventually delisted in 1994. The population of Arctic Peregrines in North America now
numbers in the thousands and continues to increase. 
8
James R. Gallagher/Sea & Sage
Clapper Rail, “Light-footed” subspecies (Rallus longirostris levipes)
1973 SSRP HCP: 7
This subspecies ranges from the San Diego Bay region of California into northern Mexico,
and, although there are no range-wide population estimates prior to 1980, significant habitat
alteration within its limited range likely had a major negative impact. Annual surveys began
in 1980 when 406 breeding birds were located. The population climbed to more than 600 by
the mid-1990s, and the 2004 count located 700 breeding individuals. Management activities
include habitat restoration, predator control, and the provision of artificial nesting rafts.
USFWS
Sandhill Crane, “Mississippi” subspecies (Grus canadensis pulla)
CH SSRP NWR: 1
1973 
The original range of this subspecies was thought to extend east along the Gulf Coastal Plain
from southern Louisiana, into Mississippi, Alabama, and the western Florida panhandle.
By the 1970s, however, as a result of habitat loss and hunting, fewer than 40 birds were
left. With the establishment of the Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife Refuge, and
the reintroduction of captive-raised birds, the wild population has now grown to more than
130 birds, 60 of which are breeding. 
USFWS
CH
Whooping Crane (Grus americana) 1973 
NWR: 49
Though it once ranged throughout the Great Plains and Gulf Coast regions, the Whooping
Crane population was decimated by hunting and habitat loss, and reduced to just 16
birds by 1941. A major captive-breeding effort was subsequently mounted to rescue the
species. Today, the main wild population, which migrates between Wood Buffalo National
Park in Canada and Aransas National Wildlife Refuge in Texas, numbers approximately 215
individuals. There are a further 80 reintroduced non-migratory birds in Florida, and 130 in
captivity. Recently, an experimental population, now numbering some 50 birds, has been
taught to migrate from Wisconsin to Florida using ultralight aircraft as guides. 
CH
Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) 1985 
ClipArt.com
SSRP
SSRP
HCP: 2 NWR: 90
Overall, the US population increased by 27 percent between 1991 and 2001 to an estimated
4,482 birds. During that period the Atlantic Coast population increased 66 percent thanks
to intensive management efforts that included restrictions on beach access during sensitive
nesting periods, and predator control. The Great Lakes population increased 80%, and the
large Great Plains population decreased by 2.5%. Preliminary 2005 estimates again show
increasing counts in Atlantic Coast and Great Lakes populations. This species also breeds in
Canada.
ClipArt.com
Least Tern, “California” subspecies (Sterna antillarum browni)
1973 SSRP HCP: 7
Habitat loss caused the population of the California Least Tern to plummet to an estimated
low of 1,164 breeding birds in 1974. Since then, recovery efforts, including predator control
programs, have led to dramatic increases, with the population assessed at approximately
13,000 nesting birds in 2004. Significant concentrations of these birds benefit from management on Department of Defense lands.
9
Bill Schmoker
Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis)
SH 1973 SSRP HCP: 14 NWR: 15 
This species declined precipitously from historic levels to approximately 10,000 birds at the
time of listing. Thanks to intensive management, the population has now increased to some
20,000. Although larger core populations continue to increase, many smaller outlying colonies
are still in decline. Several recent hurricanes have destroyed nesting trees, but artificial nest
cavities and the translocation of birds has helped to offset their effect on the population as a
whole.  
County of San Diego, Multiple Species
Conservation Program Staff
Richard Kretz
Loggerhead Shrike, “San Clemente” subspecies
(Lanius ludovicianus mearsni) 1977 MSRP
After teetering on the brink of extinction for decades, this subspecies’ fate has been
dramatically reversed thanks to cooperative captive-breeding, predator control, and habitat
management efforts that have increased the population ten-fold in just four years. Restrictions
on Naval training exercises that included live bombing of the shrike’s territory have also
contributed to its recovery. By the end of 2004, there were 169 birds on San Clemente Island
with a further 60 in captivity, up from just 16 four years earlier.  
Bell’s Vireo, “Least” subspecies (Vireo bellii pusillus)
CH SSRP HCP: 15
1986 
This Californian subspecies was reduced to approximately 600 breeding birds by 1986, but
has since rebounded thanks to management efforts. There has been up to a ten-fold increase
in some populations over the past two decades, mostly due to the control of Brown-headed
Cowbirds that parasitize vireo nests. The vireo also recently appeared in the Central Valley
of California for the first time in 60 years. It migrates south to Mexico outside the breeding
season.
Huron Manistee National Forest
Kirtland’s Warbler (Dendroica kirtlandii) 1973
SSRP
NWR: 2
This rarest member of the wood warbler family breeds primarily in Michigan, with a few birds
also nesting in Wisconsin and Ontario, Canada. The species declined due to fire suppression
programs that altered habitat, and as a result of nest parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds.
Thanks to intensive management, the number of singing males counted during the breeding
season rose from 167 in 1974 (and 1987) to 1,400 in 2005. The species spends the nonbreeding season in the islands of the Bahamas.
Bill Hubick
California Towhee, “Inyo” subspecies (Pipilo crissalis eremophilus)
CH SSRP
1987 
10
This once widespread subspecies declined to approximately 100 individuals by the late 1970s
due to a dramatic reduction of its riparian forest habitat. Following a period of stabilization,
recent increases have potentially exceeded recovery goals, although the status on Department
of Defense lands need to be confirmed through additional surveys. 
STABLE
USFWS
CH
Spectacled Eider (Somateria fischeri) 1993 
SSRP NWR: 4
Surveys indicated a drastic decline from close to 95,000 birds in the 1970s, to 3,400 in 1992
at key breeding grounds in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. This has since been linked in part to
the ingestion of spent lead shot by the birds. Pesticide residues have also been found in eggs
of this species. The use of lead shot was phased out in the Delta by 1998, and subsistence
hunting has also since been closed. The total U.S. population (including North Slope birds)
appears to have stabilized at approximately 14,000 breeding individuals since listing.  
USFWS
Northern Bobwhite, “Masked” subspecies (Colinus virginianus ridgwayi)
1973 SSRP NWR: 1
This subspecies was extirpated from its restricted U.S. range in Arizona in the late 1800s
and early 1900s, due to habitat alteration caused by cattle grazing and drought. Despite the
purchase of the Buenos Aires Ranch as a National Wildlife Refuge, and the sustained release
of captive-raised birds, the wild breeding population has remained stable at between 300
and 500 birds. There are close to 1,000 birds in captivity, and a small population also occurs
in Mexico.
Crested Caracara, “Audubon’s” subspecies (Polyborus plancus audubonii) 1987
Ashok Khosla
MSRP
NWR: 1
In the U.S., this species occurs in Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, and Florida, but only the Florida
population is listed under the ESA. Numbers appear to have stabilized prior to listing at 400500 birds, having reached a low of possibly fewer than 100 birds in the mid-70s. Reserve
purchases and easements provide a measure of habitat protection.  
USFWS
Clapper Rail, “California” subspecies (Rallus longirostris obsoletus)
1973 MSRP NWR: 1
Between the late 1800s and the late 1900s, the San Francisco Bay area lost approximately
85 percent of its tidal marsh to agriculture, development, and salt pond creation, resulting in
a catastrophic population decline in this subspecies of the Clapper Rail. Pollution and predation by foxes and free-roaming cats have likely exacerbated the threat. However, a predator
management program at the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge has proven effective.
The species expanded its range into Suisun Marsh after 1978 due to salinity changes there.
The overall population now appears stable at 1,200-1,500 birds.
11
USFWS
Clapper Rail, “Yuma” subspecies (Rallus longirostris yumanensis)
1973 SSRP HCP: 4 NWR: 4
This rare subspecies is confined to marshes along the Colorado River and around the Salton
Sea. There is also a population in northern Mexico. It is the only race of Clapper Rail found in
freshwater marshes. Estimates suggest that the U.S. breeding population in the early 1970s
was between 700 and 800 birds. This increased to more than 1,000 in the early 1990s, and
declined slightly to 809 birds in 2003. Dam construction and dredge spoil dumping have
created additional habitat for this species.
Pat Lynch/USGS
Roseate Tern (Sterna dougallii dougallii) 1987
SSRP
NWR: 13
This migratory species is widespread around the globe, but relatively rare in the U.S. Here it
occurs in two distinct populations, one nesting in the Northeast, and another in Florida (now
much reduced). After excessive market hunting was curtailed by the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act of 1918, tern populations recovered. However, this species began to decline again in
the 1950s, reaching a low of around 5,600 total U.S. breeding birds in 1977. The population
peaked at approximately 10,000 birds in 2000, thanks to management efforts such as the
provision of artificial nesting sites. The loss of natural nesting sites, human disturbance,
predation, and competition remain threats, and the population again shows a recent trend
back towards late 1980s numbers. 
Sage Sparrow, “San Clemente” subspecies (Amphispiza belli clementeae) 1977
© 2005 BonTerra Consulting
SSRP
Since sagebrush on San Clemente Island has been less affected by habitat alteration  caused
by introduced goats than have grassland areas, this subspecies has remained largely stable
despite its small population of just a few hundred birds.
Gary Smyle
Grasshopper Sparrow, “Florida” subspecies
(Ammodramus savannarum floridanus) 1986 MSRP
12
This non-migratory subspecies occurs at a handful of state Wildlife Management Areas that
are managed for it, as well as on Department of Defense lands. It has a stable but small population of between 500 and 700 birds. 
DECREASE
USFWS
Greater Prairie-chicken, “Attwater’s” subspecies
(Tympanuchus cupido attwateri) 1973 SSRP NWR: 2
This subspecies numbered approximately one million birds and ranged across some six
million acres of southern coastal prairie at the turn of the twentieth century. Today, fewer than
60 individuals are restricted to just two protected locations. Captive-breeding is underway, but
the subspecies is on the verge of extinction in the wild due to development and the spread of
invasive plants.  
Gary Smyle
Snowy Plover, “Western” subspecies (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus)
CH SSRP HCP: 10 NWR: 2
1993 
The bulk of the U.S. population occurs in California where it experienced a 21% decline
between the mid-1970s and 1995. Smaller numbers, which have shown recent increases,
also occur in Washington and Oregon. The total population currently stands at approximately
2,000 birds, but is still declining according to USFWS. A few local populations have shown
increases in response to management actions such as beach closings during nesting, and
anti-predator fencing at nest sites.
G. Van Vliet/USGS
Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus marmoratus)
CH SSRP HCP: 11 NWR: 1
1992 
This species’ ESA listing only covers the populations nesting in Washington, Oregon,
and California, where some 25,000 breeding birds occur. Estimates suggest that
these populations are declining by four to seven percent annually. Logging of old-growth forest
(used for nesting), mortality due to gill nets and oils spills, and over-fishing of the species’ food
sources are all threats. A lawsuit has recently been filed in an attempt to delist this species.
USFWS
Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl, “Cactus” subspecies
CH SSRP
(Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum) 1997 
HCP: 2 NWR: 5
This listing relates only to the Arizona population of the subspecies. Habitat for the owl has undergone significant modification in the past as a result of dams, water diversions, and urban
expansion. The number of known individuals decreased from 41 in 1999, to 18 in 2002. This
most recent drop has been linked to drought conditions. The subspecies also
occurs more commonly in Texas and Mexico. The owl has recently been proposed for delisting
as a result of a lawsuit that contends this Distinct Population Segment is neither discrete nor
significant. 
13
Patricia Velte/BackyardBirdCam.com
USFWS
Spotted Owl, “Northern” subspecies (Strix occidentalis caurina)
CH SSRP HCP: 15 NWR: 1 
SH
1990 
The Northern subspecies of the Spotted Owl requires old-growth forest for nesting, making it
vulnerable to habitat loss caused by logging, and it declined at a rate of four percent annually
between 1990 and 2003. It is also falling victim to the invasive Barred Owl, which out-competes
the Spotted Owl for nesting territories and hybridizes with it. There are currently some 7,500
breeding birds, and an additional 1,000 territorial individuals, with isolation of some population
segments due to habitat fragmentation. 
Black-capped Vireo (Vireo atricapilla) 1987
SSRP
SH HCP: 6 NWR: 3 
This species has an estimated population of 6,000 to 10,000 individuals. It is threatened by habitat
loss, fire suppression, and Brown-headed Cowbird parasitism. Despite the overall declining status
of the vireo, there have been some significant localized increases. Fort Hood, for example, improved
nesting success by 40 percent between 1987 and 1996 through a cowbird control program. Small
numbers occur in Mexico, where U.S. nesters also winter.
Scott Streit/www.bird-friends.com
Laura Erickson/Binoculars.com
Florida Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) 1987
California Gnatcatcher, “Coastal” subspecies (Polioptila californica californica)
CH HCP: 31
1993 
This northern subspecies currently has a population of approximately 5,000 birds in the
U.S. Habitat loss and nest parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds are the principal threats.
Cowbird trapping and habitat restoration have begun at some sites, and parts of the population
have been stabilized. The gnatcatcher also occurs in northern Mexico. 
USFWS
SSRP
HCP: 76 NWR: 3
SH

This species breeds only in the Edwards Plateau area of central Texas. Population estimates
indicate a steady decline linked to loss of mature juniper habitat, and to cowbird parasitism. By
2004, the population had fallen to approximately 21,000 birds. Habitat restoration and cowbird
control have increased some populations, particularly at Fort Hood, but habitat is still under
threat elsewhere. The species winters in Central America.
Seaside Sparrow, “Cape Sable” subspecies
CH
(Ammodramus maritimus mirabilis) 1973 
David La Puma
HCP: 38 NWR: 5
This species’ population, now estimated at between 8,000 and 10,000 birds, has seen an
approximate 25 percent decline since 1983. Sprawl, fire suppression, cat predation, and other
human-induced factors are the main threats. Efforts are underway to buy land, and conduct
managed burns that will create early successional scrub-oak habitats for this species. 
Golden-cheeked Warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) 1990
14
SSRP
MSRP
A dramatic decline in Cape Sable numbers from 6,450 birds in 1992 to 2,800 birds in 1995
was likely due to the effects of water level changes, and to habitat damage caused by Hurricane
Andrew. The population has now largely stabilized at between 2,800 and 3,500 birds, but has
recently shown an encouraging upward trend. It occurs within Everglades National Park and Big
Cypress National Preserve. 
UNDETERMINED
Due to a paucity of data, birds in this category are those that cannot definitively
be allocated to another category at this time.
USFWS
CH
Steller’s Eider (Polysticta stelleri) 1997 
NWR: 9
Estimates of the Alaskan breeding population made from 1989 to 2000 ranged between
350 and 5,000 birds. Numbers may have since declined, but breeding areas are remote and
difficult to survey. High concentrations of lead have been found in dead birds. The species
also breeds in Russia, and mixed flocks of Russian and American birds winter along the
Alaskan Peninsula.  
Least Tern (Sterna antillarum) 1985
Gary Smyle
SSRP
SSRP
HCP: 1 NWR: 38
Nesting on sandbars in the Mississippi, Missouri, Arkansas, Red, Platte and other major
rivers, the “Interior” Least Tern (those nesting more than 50 miles inland from the coast)
is threatened by the alteration of natural river dynamics caused by dams, channelization
projects, and water level manipulation for barge traffic. While FWS indicated an estimated
population of 5,000 terns in 1990, it was not until 2005 that the first ever range-wide survey
was completed, yielding an observed population of 17,871 birds. 
Taro Narahashi
Spotted Owl, “Mexican” subspecies (Strix occidentalis lucida)
CH SSRP HCP: 1
1993 
This subspecies of the Spotted Owl is significantly more tolerant of logging and degraded
habitats than its “Northern” counterpart, often nesting in rocky canyons as opposed to oldgrowth forest. It has an estimated population of between 777 and 1,554 birds in Utah,
Arizona, and Texas. It also occurs in northern Mexico. 
Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) 1973
NWR: 2
Arthur Allen
The exciting 2004 record of a single Ivory-bill in the “Big Woods” area of Arkansas was the
first evidence of this species’ continued existence in 60 years. A small population may have
persisted in this area, but due to lack of data, no trend can currently be inferred.
15
Ashok Khousla
Willow Flycatcher, “Southwestern” subspecies (Empidonax traillii extimus) 1995
SH
CH SSRP HCP: 19 NWR: 8 

This subspecies declined as a result of large-scale destruction of riparian forest caused by cattle
grazing and water extraction. Surveys conducted in 1995 detected 700 breeding birds, although
the estimated population has since grown to approximately 2,000. Much of this apparent
growth can be attributed to increased survey efforts, but biologists also report recent increases
at key sites such as the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area, Arizona, in response
to habitat restoration. Proposed Critical Habitat was reduced by 68% following a public comment period and USFWS support for the development of a two million acre Habitat Conservation
Plan. The flycatcher migrates south to Mexico outside the breeding season.
Extinct
USFWS
Seaside Sparrow, “Dusky” subspecies (Ammodramus maritimus nigrescens)
16
A denizen of the saltwater marshes of Brevard County, Florida, this once common subspecies
became extinct as a result of mosquito control efforts that included the flooding of Merritt
Island, the draining of marshes along the St. John’s River, and the application of pesticides. The
only remaining birds (all males) were brought into captivity in 1979. The last bird died
at Disney World in 1987.
HAWAIIAN SPECIES
Hawaiian species face a more severe barrage of threats than most mainland species, and
many either became extinct, or were on the verge of extinction when the ESA became law.
Nevertheless, nearly three times as many listed species are increasing or stable than are
decreasing.
USFWS
Increase
Hawaiian Goose
Small Kauai Thrush (Myadestes palmeri)
Hawaiian Goose (Branta sandvicensis)
Laysan Duck (Anas laysanensis)
Hawaiian Duck (Anas wyvilliana)
Common Moorhen, “Hawaiian” subspecies (Gallinula chloropus sandvicensis)
American Coot, “Hawaiian” subspecies (Fulica americana alai)
Black-necked Stilt, “Hawaiian” subspecies (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni)
Zoological Society of San Diego
Stable
Maui Parrotbill
Hawaiian Hawk (Buteo solitarius)
Akepa (Loxops coccineus coccineus)
Hawaii Creeper (Oreomystis mana)
Crested Honeycreeper (Palmeria dolei)
Palila (Loxioides bailleui)
Laysan Finch (Telespyza cantans)
Maui Parrotbill (Pseudonestor xanthophrys)
Decrease
NPS/Paul Banko
Hawaiian Dark-rumped Petrel (Pterodroma phaeopygia sandwichensis)
Townsend’s Shearwater, “Newell’s” subspecies (Puffinus auricularis newelli)
Hawaiian Crow (Corvus hawaiiensis) Now only in captivity, though captive population is stable
Elepaio, “Oahu” subspecies (Chasiempis sandwichensis ibidis)
Akiapola’au (Hemignathus munroi)
Hawaiian Darkrumped Petrel
Undetermined
Nihoa Millerbird (Acrocephalus familiaris kingi)
Nihoa Finch (Telespyza ultima)
USFWS/Paul Baker
Likely Extinct
Po’ouli
Maui Akepa (Loxops coccineus ochraceus)
Oahu Creeper (Paroreomyza maculata)
Nukupu’u (Hemignathus lucidus)
Kauai ’O’o (Moho braccatus)
’O’u (Psittirostra psittacea)
Po’ouli (Melamprosops phaeosoma)
Large Kauai Thrush (Myadestes myadestinus)
Molokai Thrush (Myadestes lanaiensis rutha)
17
The ESA acts as an emergency room for our rarest species—
T
but what should we be doing to treat the less
severe cases before they need intensive care?
hough vital for bird conservation, the ESA is a last resort to prevent species extinctions. By the time
a species is listed under the ESA it may be extremely difficult to recover, and recovery may be slow.
With few exceptions, non-listed declining bird species do not receive nearly the level of funding
they require—and typically orders of magnitude less than listed species—in many cases forcing them toward
endangerment. Not only is this a colossal risk, it is also a false economy. The cure comes at a much higher cost
than would prevention.
Species that should be considered for significant, urgent conservation help (some
of which are already considered ESA “Candidate Species”) include the Gunnison
Sage-Grouse, Lesser and Greater PrairieChickens, Long-billed Curlew, Mountain
Plover, Xantus’s and Kittlitz’s Murrelets,
and the Akikiki.
Many more species have seriously declining populations, tiny ranges, major
threats, or all three, and should also be
considered for additional conservation
attention. Examples include the Blackfooted Albatross, Sprague’s Pipit, Cerulean
Warbler, and Henslow’s Sparrow.
Additionally, several subspecies and socalled “Distinct Population Segments”
have been overlooked and allowed to
slip towards extinction. These include the
Appalachian subspecies of the Bewick’s
Wren, and the northeastern U.S. population of the Loggerhead Shrike, both of
which are now likely extirpated. A full inventory of declining subspecies is needed
so that conservation action for the rarest
birds can be implemented.
Alternative conservation strategies that
deploy significant resources to halt species declines, or prevent the threats that
could lead to ESA listing need to be implemented. Numerous conservation agencies
and organizations are addressing these—
and the broader array of threats to wild
birds. This work needs to be given the
full support of federal and state
governments.
Many more bird species outside the U.S.
also face imminent extinction, yet we still
lack a systematic approach to halting the
global extinction crisis and averting the
loss of Earth’s biodiversity.
For more information on some current
conservation initiatives, see Alliance for
Zero Extinction at www.zeroextinction.org,
North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI) at www.nabci-us.org,
and Partners in Flight at www.partnersinflight.org.
Top to bottom:
Red-legged Kittiwake/USFWS, Mountain Plover/Dick Cannings/
NatureServe, Emperor Goose/USFWS, Henslow’s Sparrow/
Laura Erickson, Binoculars.com
18
ABC’S Position Statement
on the Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act (ESA)
is perhaps the most important piece of environmental
legislation ever passed in the United States. The Act sets a
high standard for the protection of threatened species that
can be emulated around the world, and it can be credited
with numerous success stories over its 30-plus year history. The recovery of the Bald Eagle and Peregrine Falcon,
and growing or stable populations of many other listed
species, such as the Whooping Crane, are living examples
of the Act’s success.
American Bird Conservancy (ABC) believes the ESA is
fundamentally sound. We also know that the Act can be
improved to offer better protection for birds, plants, and
other wildlife, and more incentives for landowners to provide some of that protection. ABC believes a strong and
effective ESA should, as a minimum, contain the
following provisions:
 All practical means must be made available to prevent
the extinction of any species, even those with perilously small populations, as evidence shows that even
these can recover.
 Decisions about the listing of species, their recovery
goals, and their habitat and management requirements should be made by professional biologists and
based on the best available science. Criteria for these
decisions should be further clarified to help streamline the process and increase transparency.
to remain on the endangered list forever. Designation
and conservation of such habitat should be made in
conjunction with landowner incentive packages aimed
at encouraging active engagement from stakeholders.
 Through consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, all federal actions—including pesticide registrations that are currently exempted—must
be held to a recovery standard that prohibits activities
that would hamper recovery, or would significantly
delay or increase the cost of the recovery of a listed
species.
 If a species’ recovery is being impeded by a failed
Habitat Conservation Plan, the Act should require
that the Secretary of the Interior retain full authority
to intervene, while not imposing additional costs on
participating landowners.
 The Act should provide economic incentives, such as
priority treatment for federal grant programs and tax
credits to landowners who voluntarily conserve habitat, particularly those who own land that currently
harbors threatened and endangered species.
 Endangered species conservation efforts must be adequately funded. To accuse the Act of failing to save
species when recovery efforts remain under-funded is
equivalent to withholding medications, then blaming
doctors for their patients’ failure to recover.
 Take of listed species must be prohibited. Enforcement of this most basic of ESA provisions has given
rise to collaborative habitat conservation planning
across the country to the benefit of numerous species.
ABC believes that a systematic effort to address the
conservation needs of declining species before they reach
the point where they need to be listed as threatened or
endangered is also essential.
 Recovery Plans should be updated and better standardized; expenditures and progress to recovery goals
must be more easily trackable.
Additionally, concerted action in cooperation with our
trading partners in other countries is needed to conserve
endangered species and avert a global extinction crisis.
 Protected habitat must allow for the inclusion of areas
that are not currently occupied by a species, but can
be restored so that habitat becomes suitable. Without
this, many species with small populations will need
With the basic foundations listed above, we believe that
the Act will retain its position as one of the cornerstones
of environmental law in the United States.
19
P.O. Box 249, The Plains, VA 20198
540-253-5780
www.abcbirds.org
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
American Bird Conservancy, 2006
Piping Plover
© Garth McElroy/VIREO